Year: 2003

(In theaters, July 2003) Argh. One can say a lot of nasty things about bad movies, but this is something else; a fantastic premise gone horribly dull, a botched adaptation and a waste of talents. A well-written The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen would have been a movie for the ages, a landmark in a tired field of adventure blockbusters. The original graphic novel is a wonder of literacy; alas, the film was executed by lesser artists. Only the title, character names and basic concepts of the original work has survived: A team of literary superheroes is assembled to battle threats to the Victorian empire. Some initial changes work well (Dorian Gray), some don’t (Tom Sawyer) and some are simply useless (Mina Harker, vampire!) But what sounds like a promising start turns sour as soon as the team is assembled and they’re off on their first assignment in Venice. This ill-conceived sequence stretches suspension of disbelief and snaps it. (Where to begin? The submarine fitting in the canals, the car chase, the reaction of the crowd, the dumb “firebreak” idea or the snipers standing by just in case?) From then on, all the fancy steampunk designs, cool Sean Connery moments or action sequences can’t save this film from a disappointed verdict. It’s not bad enough to be ridiculous (the set design alone is worth our attention), but it’s not good enough to do justice to the premise. If you’re going to set up all of these interesting elements only to ignore their potential, why bother?

(Second viewing, On DVD, August 2004) A year later, this film is still as frustrating as it was on opening weekend: So much potential wasted! The DVD at least has the decency to offer a making-of that’s more interesting than the usual promo stuff found on other blockbusters. The audio commentaries aren’t bad either, though it’s kind of interesting to hear the producer of the film spend a significant amount of his time answering fan-boy criticism by repeating that it’s “just a fantasy”. Uh-huh.

(In theaters, July 2003) It’s too bad that Rowan Atkinson has become famous for his character of “Mr. Bean” rather than for “Edmund Blackadder”. This film is sort of a rehash of Bean’s bumbling physical antics along with a feeble attempt at replicating the Bond films. Neither portion works; Atkinson’s pratfalls quickly become tiresome, and he does scarcely little to make us cheer for him. (Only when he does slip on the Blackadder poise and becomes a devastatingly efficient agent -in his dreams or delusions- does he truly come alive and charming.) Confronted with the accumulating evidence of his incompetence, the heroine’s infatuation with English becomes less than a cypher and more of a screenwriter’s conceit. (On the other hand, Natalie Imbruglia does a good job at looking cute and saying her lines properly.) It’s not as if the film is worthless: the car chase stands out as an inspired bit of comedy, Atkinson has his moments, it’s fun to contemplate the very British horror of being ruled by a Frenchman and the film’s all-too-brief depiction of “Canadians” is hilarious. But as a Bond parody, it never gets running. As a comedy, it’s definitely low on laughs. And as an amusing character piece, it never earns our sympathy.

(On DVD, July 2003) Flashback alert! What does a movie about a federally-protected ex-hitman moving in a quiet suburban neighbourhood remind you of? Yes, that’s right, The Whole Nine Yard. This straight-to-video film not only replays the same basic idea, but also does so in Montréal, which here unconvincingly stands-in for “Little Rock, Arkansas”. (No amount of American flags and lone US-Post mailboxes can hide the characteristic architecture, Canadian money and equally-lone Canada Post mailboxes) Armand Assante is the “Bruce Willis” of this film, though the character dynamics beyond that change a lot: Here, he seduces the neighbour’s wife while her husband is in cahoots with his mistress to reveal Assante’s location to the mob. Yes, it really sounds like a rip-off, but it’s executed with some competence and the result is a great deal more interesting than you’d expect from such a premise. Dina Meyer is frequently hot as the mistress and Assante does a lot to help the film’s credibility. Also notable is the film’s intention to play most of the story straight, with only occasional comedic moments. The finale is far too long, the budget is limited, some of the tone shifts are uncomfortable and the “ripoff!” impulse never goes away, but it’s a decent enough film, better than some of the worst things I’ve seen in theatres this year. The DVD contains no special features of note.

(On DVD, July 2003) Now here’s a real curiosity: On one hand, this straight-to-video release is in many way the most horrible thing you’ve ever seen passed as a putative “movie”: muddy digital film quality, dumb plotting and some of the worst acting you’re ever likely to see. (No joke nor hyperbole! Motoko Nagino is one hot Asian lady, but her line delivery is atrocious!) And yet, despite the micro-budget, the movie periodically erupts in a flurry of eye-popping stunts and cool action sequences. In many ways, this is a lot like an American early-Jackie Chan film, a comparison made easy by the raw, goofy charm of lead actor Johnny Yong Bosch. Intricate fight scenes, heart-stopping stunt driving and a nifty parachute climax pepper the inane plot like so many unexpected goodies. In this case, even the micro-budget becomes an advantage, as there’s scarcely any place for CGI trickery, stunt doubles or fancy camera angles; everything feels dangerously real. (One standout shot has a protagonist hanging on top of a crashing car, inside a shack, hitting his head against a low wood beam! Ow!) As the film advances, it becomes clear that this is practically a stunt demo reel, strung together by a small crew in order to gain experience and have some fun. Considered this way, Extreme Heist is far more sympathetic, a little unpretentious movie that does because it can. Heck, considered this way I might even recommend that you take a look. The DVD edition is marred by an awful digital transfer and contains no special features: a real shame considering the making-of story that must lie behind the film!

(On DVD, July 2003) Coming straight from Australia, this docu-fictive account of the life of criminal Mark Brandon “Chopper” Read is stuffed with interesting moments, but you’ll have to work hard at understanding anything. Hey, I think Australia’s a great nation filled with cool people, but when I can’t understand anything at all in a movie that doesn’t even feature subtitles (those insensitive DVD-making clods!), I’m not particularly interested in following the film. Fortunately, the French-language audio track was more intelligible. While the film lost something in translation, it was still better than to try to decipher the thick Australian street-talk. Yes, Chopper is obviously a low-budget film: the lengthy shots, grainy film stock, oversaturated colours, static camera and sparse sets aren’t just a stylistic choice. I suppose that the target audience of the film already knows “Chopper”, because the film presents important clues about his achievements in what is almost a casual fashion; pieces are missing here and there, and there’s no making-of on the disc to help us figure it out. It is, indeed, a fictional representation of a real person. In any case, the real winner of the film is Eric Bana, whose representation of “Chopper” runs a fine line between jovial innocence and hard-edged brutality. Frightening and charismatic at once, it’s easy to see why he was hired for The Hulk after this film. (The irony, though, is that he deliver a better performance as a “Hulk” here than in the latter film.) The film does features quite a few clever moments, but not quite nearly enough to compensate for its uneven quality. As mentioned, the Canadian Alliance-Atlantis DVD contains no special features worth mentioning and no subtitles, but it does sport a more intelligible French-language track.

(On VHS, July 2003) Wretched. No other word for it. Obviously a B-grade film with its low-budget feel, from unconvincing acting to muddy cinematography, dirty sets and laughable monsters. Ostentatiously about toxic wastes creating monsters in New York’s underground tunnels, C.H.U.D. is closer to an endurance contest as a laboriously overworked plot is slooowly set up with a bunch of amateur actors. I suppose that genre enthusiasts might get some value out of it, but everyone else may want to steer clear away. It’s dull, not particularly involving, saddled with a ridiculous “climax” that falls flat and peopled with uninteresting characters that don’t die quickly enough. Celebrity-watchers may notice a younger John Goodman in a cameo role as a hungry policeman. Otherwise, well, you’ve got other things to do.

(On DVD, July 2003) Hmmm: A straight-to-video thriller starring David Caruso. How less promising can a film possibly be? As it turns out, though, Black Point actually holds some interest. Plot? An ex-soldier falls for the moll of a local northwestern drug lord, three million dollars pop up, betrayals ensue. There are a few fun plot twists, one amusing threat of icy lynching, a spectacular blonde heroine (Susan Haskell) and a decent pace nonetheless. Sure, the film looks cheap; the cinematography is optimized for full-frame presentation and the set designs are definitely sparse. (Plus, the town of Black Point definitely feels underpopulated.) Character-wise, it’s also a dud: The hero is a hero because the film says so, the motivations of the heroine remain muddled and the bad guys aren’t particularly interesting. But as long as your expectations are kept low, you just might get some enjoyment out of the whole thing. The bare-bones full-screen (yuck) DVD’s most interesting feature is a series of trailers for other RemStar straight-to-video features: funny stuff!

(In theaters, July 2003) You don’t have to be a sadistic teenage sociopath to enjoy this film, but it definitely helps. Given that the original Bad Boys was the last dying gasp of the 1984-1995 era of R-rated buddy-cop adventures, it’s fitting that this sequel feels, in many ways, like a throwback to the eighties. Equal parts “Miami Vice” and “Grand Theft Auto: Vice City”, this is first and foremost an action film, and it is never better than during the first fantastic car chase, featuring disintegrating cars dumped from a vehicle carrier on a claustrophobic Miami bridge. Memorable stuff even in a summer season packed with great car chases. (And memorable even though the basic concept has been used previously in Tokyo Raiders, much like the shantytown smash-down may very well have been suggested by a similar sequence in Police Story.) Other action sequences hold up rather well, and clearly show that even if director Michael Bay proves to be illiterate, he can move the camera and film mayhem like nobody else. Stupid action movies like this one are his forte, not pretentious pseudo-patriotic drivel like Pearl Harbor. His nervy direction is one of Bad Boys 2‘s many pleasures, along with the cool Miami locations, a wonderful Gabrielle Union, a très slick Will Smith, Joe Pantoliano’s caricatural cop chief and a few good comedy bits. Heck, even Martin Lawrence is generally tolerable, anchored as he is by Smith’s solid presence. He’s annoying, but he’s supposed to be. Had the movie concentrated on its strengths, if would have been a dynamite piece of action film. Alas, it doesn’t, and goes floundering in lengthy “hilarious” digressions (Martin’s exstasy trip is unbearable), gratuitous gross-outs and lame setups. It all adds up to a bloated two-and-a-half-hours film that contains a bit too many clunky elements to be totally successful.

(Second viewing, On DVD, March 2004) I love filmed mayhem, and few recent films have delivered so much of it as Michael Bay’s cheerfully sadistic sequel. It’s far from being a perfect film as a whole (dumb humor, choppy storytelling, uneven interest, etc.) but parts of it attain something very close to action perfection. The MacArthur Freeway chase sequence is an anthology piece; the shantytown destruction is a guilty pleasure; the opening credit sequence is a model of big-budget storytelling and the hearse pursuit is a gift for everyone’s inner sadist. Still, whatever you think of the film, there’s plenty of good things to say about the special-edition DVD, which gives an unparallelled glimpse in the making of a big-budget action film. There is little or no narration; the “video diary” approach, on the other hand, is tremendously effective. There is no audio commentary on the film, but the plethora of extras on the second disk make this absence irrelevant. I was especially impressed by the Freeway chase making-of. Spectacular!

(On DVD, July 2003) I don’t think anyone expected anything great from this straight-to-video sequel to the underrated 2000 black comedy. While this isn’t up to the level of quality of the first film, it’s actually not bad at all. Story: Patrick Bateman’s teen killer dedicates her life to crime-fighting, and if a few other students threaten her inevitable internship at the FBI… well, they’ll have to be taken out of consideration, right? The biting black comedy works more often than it doesn’t and if there are a number of useless plot twists in the third act, the film’s conclusion still packs a cute little punch that goes a long way toward satisfying any viewer with a taste for that foolishness. Interestingly enough, there’s very little gore in this film despite the regular murders: the emphasis is on the sarcastic narration and the black comedy more than the visceral horror thrills. William Shatner (yes, him) turns in an amusing performance as a middle-aged teacher, while Mila Kunis just may do good things if she keeps getting interesting roles like the psychotic “Rachael Newman”. As a teen horror film considered on its own merits (and not as a sequel), it’s surprisingly decent (far better than most of the crap that actually makes it to theatres) because it’s more funny than grisly. The DVD contains a few deleted scenes (some good stuff there), outtakes (ditto) and two commentary tracks, but director Morgan J. Freeman’s whiny, obvious patter is insufferable after ten minutes.

(In theaters, July 2003) It’s not particularly original to mix zombie films with post-apocalyptic SF, but I suppose that every generation needs its own “last man on Earth” story. Crudely shot on muddy digital video, 28 Days Later looks and feels exactly like the kind of film to acquire a cult following. Naturally, it’s also the kind of film to deserve cries of “overrated!” Certainly, it’s not all that good: Most of the film’s first half is spent hearing character say “don’t do this!” and then seeing other character do exactly that, with dire consequences. The latter half of the film slides into an unreal Ramboesque fantasy of one lone man decimating a bunch of villains. (Plus, it deals with primal topics our enlightened age would rather avoid) Director Danny Boyle adopts the stylistic philosophy that fast cutting, loud noises and grisly half-images equate terror. Alas, for some, this merely equals boredom: it will work for some and work against others. While not particularly bad nor good, 28 Days Later still holds some interest, especially if you haven’t drunk your fill of post-apocalyptic horror.